• Save 15% on ALL SFF Network merch, until Dec 31st! Use code SFF2024 at checkout. Click here!

General Chat Thread

PlayfulPhoenix

Founder of SFF.N
SFFLAB
Chimera Industries
Gold Supporter
Feb 22, 2015
1,052
1,990
I have it going right now.

So far there are a few things I find very interesting and a lot of things I don't find interesting at all.
 

Phuncz

Lord of the Boards
SFFn Staff
May 9, 2015
5,954
4,957
Hmm usually their events are on Tuesdays, I missed this one (watching now) because of this. But it's WWDC that starts on Mondays, it's been a while they've announced hardware on WWDC.

Not really amazed, a lot of evolutionary progress, although iOS seems promising.
 

VegetableStu

Shrink Ray Wielder
Aug 18, 2016
1,949
2,619
Kinda excited on some points (OSX HS finally getting to eGPUs; getting on the VR game; iPad Pro capable of handling AR and particle physics at the same time), but yeah I can't buy anything they have now so it's not something I can fully appreciate. Probably just feeling good for them at the spectator stand on their technical front.

Also they just made their trashcan obsolete.

Also also the HomePod thing reminds me of a kiwi fruit for some reason
 
  • Like
Reactions: Soul_Est

Soul_Est

SFF Guru
SFFn Staff
Feb 12, 2016
1,536
1,928
Just when I thought I saw all the names: High Sierra
iMac Pro would have been more interesting with Threadripper. I'd like to see how Apple would build a cohesive AMD setup instead of an Intel based one. Considering the RAM limitations, it should be up Apple's alley. That said, Thunderbolt 3 would pose a small issue.
 

PlayfulPhoenix

Founder of SFF.N
SFFLAB
Chimera Industries
Gold Supporter
Feb 22, 2015
1,052
1,990
That said, Thunderbolt 3 would pose a small issue.

Ironically, now that Intel has opened Thunderbolt 3 up, it wouldn't pose an issue at all in the future. But given that Intel won't be ceding the efficiency crown anytime soon, I'd imagine that the moment Apple ditches Intel, they'd be ditching x86 entirely.
 

PlayfulPhoenix

Founder of SFF.N
SFFLAB
Chimera Industries
Gold Supporter
Feb 22, 2015
1,052
1,990
It seems like Apple just wants to continue the naming convention whereby keeping part of the name means that the update is focused on underlying improvements that retain the look and feel of the current version (rather than bringing in a bunch of changes that make it feel different). Which is fine by me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VegetableStu

jtd871

SFF Guru
Jun 22, 2015
1,166
851
given that Intel won't be ceding the efficiency crown anytime soon, I'd imagine that the moment Apple ditches Intel, they'd be ditching x86 entirely.

A couple of quibbles:
1) Intel may have the efficiency crown, but AMD has shown that they can be competitive enough that the gap can be overlooked if Apple wants to. As a consumer, I'm leaning AMD for my next build (and that's BEFORE Intel's self-inflicted wounds at Computex).
2) Hardware is going nowhere but more power-efficient as a function of time (both Intel and AMD), so thermal solutions that work well today will continue to work regardless of the hardware it's cooling.
3) If Apple ditches x86, they'd need to support legacy x86 software (somehow) or risk losing market share. I'd guess they would go carefully and probably see how Microsoft fares with Windows on ARM. That being said, Apple is reportedly doing it's own GPU design for an upcoming mobile CPU, so maybe they'll decide to vertically integrate to the fullest extent (OS + hardware).
 

BirdofPrey

Standards Guru
Sep 3, 2015
797
493
Apple has switched CPUs twice already. First from Motorala 68k series to POWER then to x86, and they included emulators to run old software. Nowadays virtualization is even easier since it's something that's started to be considered when developing the hardware (both x86 and ARM have instruction set extensions to support hardware virtualization).
 

PlayfulPhoenix

Founder of SFF.N
SFFLAB
Chimera Industries
Gold Supporter
Feb 22, 2015
1,052
1,990
1) Intel may have the efficiency crown, but AMD has shown that they can be competitive enough that the gap can be overlooked if Apple wants to. As a consumer, I'm leaning AMD for my next build (and that's BEFORE Intel's self-inflicted wounds at Computex).

Intel's architecture, strategic platform differentiators (from Thunderbolt to Optane), predilection and preferential treatment to Apple, and platform efficiency cumulatively matter more to Apple than any advantage AMD could tempt them with, perf-per-dollar included. Trust me, Apple will never use a CPU for Mac designed by AMD. Never ever ever. They're as likely to use a CPU for mobile designed by AMD.

2) Hardware is going nowhere but more power-efficient as a function of time (both Intel and AMD), so thermal solutions that work well today will continue to work regardless of the hardware it's cooling.

Intel has had a persistent growing advantage relative to AMD in this respect. By the time AMD matches Intel's efficiency today, Intel will be years ahead. That's not tenable for Apple given their industrial design and product feature priorities. Heck, Apple is frustrated with these things with Intel already, since they know that they're actually better at this stuff on ARM than Intel is on x86.

3) If Apple ditches x86, they'd need to support legacy x86 software (somehow) or risk losing market share. I'd guess they would go carefully and probably see how Microsoft fares with Windows on ARM. That being said, Apple is reportedly doing it's own GPU design for an upcoming mobile CPU, so maybe they'll decide to vertically integrate to the fullest extent (OS + hardware).

Apple has the most experience of any company doing this - they created Rosetta when migrating Macs from PowerPC to Intel/x86 to ease that transition, and it did the job. Of course, it would help a lot if they proliferated a popular programming language years ahead of time, that can be compiled both to x86 and ARM... ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Phuncz

VegetableStu

Shrink Ray Wielder
Aug 18, 2016
1,949
2,619


*spit take*
 

jØrd

S̳C̳S̳I̳ ̳f̳o̳r̳ ̳l̳i̳f̳e̳
sudocide.dev
SFFn Staff
Gold Supporter
LOSIAS
Jul 19, 2015
818
1,359
You cant, Anish Kapoor has an exclusive license. Black 2.0 was developed as a response to this and has somewhere around the same light absorbing properties. The terms of sale for black 2.0:

By adding this product to your cart you confirm that you are not Anish Kapoor, you are in no way affiliated to Anish Kapoor, you are not purchasing this item on behalf of Anish Kapoor or an associate of Anish Kapoor. To the best of your knowledge, information and belief this paint will not make it’s [sic] way into the hands of Anish Kapoor.

edit: ninjad by @iFreilicht
 
  • Like
Reactions: Phuncz

jeshikat

Jessica. Wayward SFF.n Founder
Silver Supporter
Feb 22, 2015
4,969
4,784
To be fair, they act like Anish Kapoor secured the license for himself just so he could screw every other artist in the world.

But Vantablack has export and personal sales restrictions due to its military applications. So it's more like he got the license to demonstrate its artistic uses since he's based in the UK so Surrey NanoSystems can keep an eye on him.
 

jØrd

S̳C̳S̳I̳ ̳f̳o̳r̳ ̳l̳i̳f̳e̳
sudocide.dev
SFFn Staff
Gold Supporter
LOSIAS
Jul 19, 2015
818
1,359
Wait? What?
How is that even a thing?
Follow the money for an answer to that one I expect

There is also glitteriest glitter and pinkest pink both of which have similar terms of sale.

Even w/ the export restrictions i'd guess there are probably other artists w/ in the UK / export safe countries who would have loved to have gotten their hands on the blackest black. His response to the pinkest pink probably didn't help much either. Artists are a dramatic bunch.